from a response to an earlier post:
In the vernacular I've been taught, feedback is a response, reaction to a stimulus directed toward the initiator of the stimulus by the target of the stimulus. I would add that in social science systems,
I would not be so restrictive and say: "a response/reaction to a stimulus directed toward the initiator of the stimulus from any source".
- Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.
- -Samuel Johnson
Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell
--- On Thu, 12/3/09, Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG> wrote:
From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
Subject: Re: Definition of strategy, strategy must be an adaptive feedback system
To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
Date: Thursday, 12 March, 2009, 4:41 AM
Then what do you call the case where a finding in one process is used to change some other aspect of the enterprise that is not part of that 'process'? Can't be feedback because there was no feed in the first place. Jack ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 6:52 PM Subject: Re: Definition of strategy, strategy must be an adaptive feedback system
I'd distinguish between feedback and feedforward in processes a little more (if I was to distinguish between them at all).
Feeback is where one takes 'data' from later in the process and feed it back to some earlier stage. E.g. looking at the quality of the output and making changes as a result of that
Feedforward is where one take 'data' from earlier stages and feeds it forward to a later stage. E.g. looking at the quality of inputs and making changes as a result.
So one might reasonably take about customer feedback and supplier feedforward. But I doubt anyone does that. Kind regards Peter On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 6:20 AM, Romie Littrell <littrellaom@yahoo.co.nz> wrote: I was a process engineer in a previous part of my life in the last century, so I have that cognitive bias. I'll look into "feed forward". If we're going to be semantically correct, we should say "feed-back-and-forward", as the actor perceives the stimulus, responds to it and sometimes changes the stimulus, and reacts to the changed stimulus.
Maybe "The Divine Pattern of Infinite Repetition is The Universe" is The Way.
Romie --- On Tue, 10/3/09, Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG> wrote:
From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
Subject: Re: Definition of strategy, strategy must be an adaptive feedback system Date: Tuesday, 10 March, 2009, 3:21 AM
Romie,
Thanks for the post. Good thinking.
I suggest that you are really talking about feed-forward. Feedback is an
engineering term that ignores time. Many business people misinterpret the
term.
Findings from situation assessment of on-going operations and of effects
wrought on customers and suppliers can affect only what comes after.
This moves you away from the control theory model and closer to the brain
theory model in which synapses are preconditioned to process stimuli
differently than before. Strategy must anticipate the impediments yet to be
encountered and think in terms of the resources yet to appear.
Note that I am not taking issue with what you say, only suggesting a way of
saying it that will generate less ambiguity in the 'student.'
Onward,
Jack Ring
|
|
|